Talk:Atheism
I think that 'Atheism is a religion for people who don't belive in religions' :) Brian 20:02, 13 April 2006 (UTC) If atheism is a religion then health is a disease - atheism is the ABSENCE of belief in gods, angels and all other supernatural creatures, things or events; while theism is the presence of belief in gods, angels etc - Also it would help if you would read your bible - the whole thing - not just cherry pick. You will find a multitude of contradictions, violence, and just plain lunacy. These were primitive people trying to explain the world around themselves with limited knowledge of the world/universe. - Steve :Well then couldn't agnosticism fit there too? :/ Homestarmy 04:08, 14 April 2006 (UTC) ::Yep :) Brian 08:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC) :::I'm not so sure. Agnostics don't know what to believe ;) Archola 07:47, 19 April 2006 (UTC) Evil does not exist, it is Good that does. Evil does not exist, it is Good that does. Sin is not the absense of Good, Evil is. --Hayson1991 01:06, 21 April 2006 (UTC) :What does that have to do with anything? It doesn't prove atheism is wrong like you were obviously trying to do. Like most religious people, you fail it. ::Neither Christianity (or any other religion) nor Atheism can be proved. Attempting to "prove" one or the other wrong is, not to be rude, foolishness. All we can do is argue about probabilities and motives, as these are the two main factors which encourage belief or non-belief in a religion. -- P.B. Pilhet / Talk 20:33, 26 June 2007 (UTC) 1. Evil does exist (according to your Bible) See Isaiah 45:7. 2. Atheism can be proven as can Christianity. If you say you are a Christian then you are (maybe not a TRUE one - many denominations say the others are false). When I say I am an atheist, I simply am saying that I do not believe in gods, demons, angels, fairies, pixies, cherubs, ghosts or any other supernatural thingees. An atheist is someone without a theist belief. Thats all. YOU are an atheist when it comes to Zeus or Apollo (you do not believe in them). I just disbelieve in the existence one more god than you do (or is it 3 more as in the trinity - one more item NOT in the bible. - Steve Atheism requires faith Atheism requires faith - either direct faith in the statement "There is no God" or indirectly through whatever forms the basis of their worldview. (i.e. science requires faith in the unprovable principles and assumptions that lie behind it's methods) --69.243.255.130 16:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC) Science does not require faith in unprovable principles. I you take a simple science course like in the 4th or 5th grade you will be doing some simple experiments to show things like gravity or centrifical force. Thats how our nation can do things like send people to the moon. By using the provable, verifiable and many times over demonstrated principles. Who would you rather do a heart transplant on you - a doctor using SCIENCE and provable principles or someone who just has faith that they can do it? apologize but when I hear someone saying this about science I start to get angry because this is something that should have been learned at an early age. Science is about looking at the world and seeing what is and then proving it over and over and over again with other scientists or just plain people trying to find things wrong with theories. Thats how science gets better. Nothing is taken on faith. Others will pick apart your methods, theories or conclusions until only the truth remains. Science is ruthless. - Steve The purpose of this article... It seems to me like this article is mainly aimed at converting atheists. IMO we should just include christian views on atheism then stop there. If the purpose of the article is to convert atheists then you have to know what an atheist is. Not what you think they are. I am someone who does not have a believe in supernatural things. I think that what we can detect and reason out is all there is. No hocus pocus, no magic, no sorcery. Things obey natural laws and that is it. - Steve If you want to just include the christian view then just say "Christians believe that atheists ...... " That will be your view and then if you want an atheist rebuttal go to the Internet Infidels website and ask for a dissenting view. - Steve Occam's razor Occam's razor states that of equal (not any) explanations, the simplest one tends to be correct. It does not state that something is right just because it is simpler, but because it has the same explanatory power and requires less assumptions. Thus, it does not posit that it is more likely for a popsicle to randomly assemble itself, because the chances involved are abysmal. The rest in that paragraph seems to be a straw-man version of the Dawkin's Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit. –Reinis 18:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC) :Hi Reinis, and welcome to the encyclopedia! You're free to change the Occam's razor paragraph if you want, as long as it reflects a Christian perspective. -- P.B. Pilhet / Talk 20:37, 26 June 2007 (UTC) Discussion on "Atheists think the Bible is morally deficient" *On Genocide: You mentioned three things in your latest edit which I totally disagree with. First is the "that worship other gods part." If God exists, and He is the only God, then why would He tolerate people worshipping other false gods? Especially when the people originally came from Him? Second is about the "higher power." You are fully correct that there is no higher power than God. But because God created a world where there is such things as good and evil, God is morally required to act "good." Therefore, He had to purge the evil around the Israelites. Third, God did create evil, but in a "round-about way." By placing the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the garden, He created the possibility for evil. God Himself did not actually go out and do something evil. As for why He created the possibility for evil, it's because He wanted a world in which there would be true love, not a world were everyone would worship Him and care for eachother like robots. What kind of a world is that? But the only for there to be true love is for there to be a choice to not love. And the only way for there to be choice is to have evil. Evil is, simply put, any action or thought which is unloving, first to God, and then to others. The passage in Isaiah says "I CREATE EVIL" it does not say "possibility" it does not say "round-about". If the Bible is supposed to be the word of God then why does it not mean what it says? Is he confused? Is he trying to fuzzy up the meaning? Was it copied wrong? If the Bible is to be believed then why is it to be believed in a "round-about" way. Either it is true or not. - Steve One more note on the "evil" bit. Be careful when you quote Bible passages (especially in the Old Testament) that refer to "evil." A lot of times, evil actually just refers to "calamity," not actually sin. War, for instance, could be called calamity. I am careful when I quote Bible passages. I make sure that I quote exactly what it says. I do not try to spin it or interpret it or make it say anything but what it says. Be careful when you tell someone that what the Bible says is not what it means. Remember the little thing about how bad it is to lead someone astray? - Steve *On Rape: Your answer to my refutation is off the point. Your original argument was that "rape victims were required to marry the rapist." However, your answer seems to be doing more for my argument than yours. The verses you listed only clarify that when a woman is truely raped, only the man must die (and how could a dead man marry a woman?). Now if the man and woman both had consensual out-of-wedlock sex, then they both would die, but only if they were conclusively found guilty. There's another verse, I can't remember exactly where, that says "you should never put anyone to death, unless their crime can be confirmed by two or more witnesses." I looked at this Wiki to learn more about Christianity. When I read this article, where the Christian response begins "who says?", I decided to take a closer look. I found these translations: Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (New International Version)å 28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. a He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (New American Standard Bible) 28"(A)If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, 29then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (The Message) 28-29 When a man comes upon a virgin who has never been engaged and grabs and rapes her and they are found out, the man who raped her has to give her father fifty pieces of silver. He has to marry her because he took advantage of her. And he can never divorce her. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (English Standard Version) 28(A) "If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, 29then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (New Century Version) 28 If a man meets a virgin who is not engaged to be married and forces her to have sexual relations with him and people find out about it,29 the man must pay the girl's father about one and one-fourth pounds of silver. He must also marry the girl, because he has dishonored her, and he may never divorce her for as long as he lives. It seems that many of your translators are saying this passage is about rape. I wanted to learn about your religion, but it doesn't impress me if your argument is fundamentally dishonest. Combining this with the advertizing on your page with girls in bikinis, I cannot help but wonder if Christian morality thinks rape is okay. :Hi, and welcome to the CKB (Christianity Knowledge Base)! First, you'll have to excuse those goofy advertisements - they're from Wikia, and we have no control over them. Second, concerning rape, I think it's very important to not "center in" on one specific verse or passage in the Bible and forget the rest. Rape is still a sin, and whoever perpetrated such an act would have to obtain forgiveness from God. In the Old Testament, before Jesus, that would have meant repentance (changing your actions and your heart) along with a sacrifice. In modern times, Jesus has become the ultimate sacrifice, so those are never needed anymore. To be forgiven of your sins and to be saved, you must do the following: :#Accept Jesus as your savior through prayer; :#Ask for forgiveness for the evil you have committed; :#And truly repent and turn your heart away from all sin. :If you're interested in learning more about Christianity, I would suggest reading all four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). After that, read the rest of the New Testament. I wouldn't read the Old Testament until after you have a solid background in the New, because it's mainly just a historical narrative of Israel - it does contain the Law as given to the Jews, but Jesus Himself indicated numerous times how the Law is easily twisted to mean something it doesn't (just look around the talk pages on this site for proof :P). Therefore, I wouldn't read it without first studying Jesus' (and His apostles') teachings. :God bless, and I hope you find the Truth! :) -- P.B. Pilhet / Talk 23:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC) *On Slavery: God knows everything in advance, but He will not forcefully make someone believe in Him (again, from the genocide bit, where's the true love in that?). He will only give people the best opportunity to believe in Him, and to the heathens at the time, slavery to the Chosen People was the best chance. True - there is no love in genocide; which the old testament reeks of at the command of God. But slavery being the best chance for people to know of God? Why was the target audience mostly the unmarried, virgin (I assume virgin as in never having known a man) girls. Kill the men, women and boys but leave the young virgins alive to be slaves. I'm also thinking that rape will be involved with these young girls (I could be wrong - they may have let them die as spinster slaves). Can't you feel the love? - Steve I like the dancing here. You say God is "morally required" to be good forgetting the fact that He actually created evil. That would make him more evil than all the despots, dictator, rapists, murderers and torturers that have ever existed. Then you neglect the fact that IF God knows every outcome of every second of existence then he knew that after the flood that people would multiply and be even more heinous than they had ever been. Then He had to sacrifice himself to himself to satisfy some blood debt that he specified as payment for peoples sins. To me if there was an omnipotent god then he could have just zapped sin out and forgiven everyone without the -making the young virgin pregnant-cloning himself-preaching to a tiny slice of the world and then having the Romans (not the Jews) kill him so that everybody who believed the whole weird fairy tale could be forgiven. (Don't get me started on the Roman Catholic Church blaming the Jews for killing the Christ when if memory is correct they were simply vassals of the Roman empire and weren''t even allowed to execute people themselves. Sorry for the rant but Christianity befuddles me. So much ignorance, forgetting history, twisting sacred texts and condescencion to members of its own community not to mention the folks who don't believe in boogers, spirits, gods, demons, trolls, leprechauns and other mythical critters. Like unicorns or cockatrice or dragons in the Bible. Look it up. Thats why I am an atheist. It is all too fantastic for someone to believe if they have a mind. Thank you and good bye -- enjoyed the dance but I have to talk to people who are sane. -- Steve